ATACMS aren't real and can't hurt you
ATACMS aren't real and can't hurt you
ATACMS aren't real and can't hurt you
It's Western lies. Ukraine never had ATACMs. The minor damage to 8 helicopters, an ammo depot, and more was caused by tactical Ukranian gypsy witches.
Why is that optic 6 inches off the top of that AK?
AI is going to doom us all, I swear
Baba Yaga, baba ganoush I'll take either
Houses with chicken legs are surprisingly stealthy.
nine helis
Isn't "gypsy" a racist slur?
Generally it is used that way by anyone not self identifying.
Here it is used in hyperbole that seems to me as mocking the stereotype due to context and Russia being the obvious butt of the joke.
We're on NCD so I try to make this sound like overblown russian copium. Denying what happened and the "minor damage" is part of the joke that it is "completely destroyed" because Russia lies and makes subsequent attacks just as unexpected as the first, a reference to the shock factor of Himars strikes.
I apologize for any offense.
They really named the missiles "attack 'ems" huh
Well they said we couldn't call them Fuck 'ems anymore
Fully Knowledgeable Missile System.
You know, because it knows where it is.
We need to start development on the FNDOUT missile sytem.
I've only ever been a government contractor, never military myself, but you quickly learn that some acronyms were destined to be enunciated as-is, rather than spelt out.
"ATACMS" was just so natural
Losses aren't real. Russian air force aren't real.
Russian air force arenât real.
strike on Berdyansk took out 9 helis, SAM site, ammo depot and some other things, and we don't know anything about strike in Luhansk
so yeah, soon
peskov already cried that there's no point in supplying ATACMS if russia is losing. k we'll make sure it's losing harder
I think they assume that Ukraine support will wane over time, that the West will get distracted and stubborness alone will turn the tide.
He's assuming that because that's what he would do in this situation, because he has the critical thinking skills of a spanner. He thinks every other politician is like him, he doesn't get that most of them are basically just constantly playing in a personality contest, which is something he's never had to do.
There's basically flat support for the war at the moment, there isn't really any interest in removing support and there isn't really any interest in granting additional support (actual military intervention, WMDs). As long as Europeans are not adversely affected by the existence of this war, the support isn't going to go anywhere.
If somebody were to turn up with some actual evidence that say we could have built 30,000 houses but instead we sent Ukraine 20 missiles, or whatever, then maybe that would turn the tide, but I don't think anybody has that data because in most countries military spending is pre-allocated.
I'm assuming that, in this case, Russian air force history started in the 1990s
There where no Russia as it is today before December 1991, no matter what soveebs try to imply